Why is more prestige associated with being able to play ?

[mcgillcomposer]

I can't think of any musicologist who would call themselves an artist on the basis of their musicology. 

Yes, and the ones who do are generally the ones with nothing interesting to say - pretentiousness in the arts...that's an age-old tale.

[ramseytheii]

I guess I can't understand why people hear the word 'musicologist,' and automatically assume the worst.  What have these innocent, sequestered people - who in past centuries would have been harmless monks, happy among their studies and praising the Lord throughout the day - ever done to you, by you I mean you in general, to harbor such negativity in your mind?

When I think of a musicologist, I think of a jolly fellow in tweeds, perhaps with a soft beard, who gets no more pleasure than to open the pages of music history and analysis, who gets no more pleasure than to find the hidden connections which create historical continuity, who gets no more pleasure than to find the secrets that lie within the music, and to link the music with external events. 

What is so frightening about these people to you, that you decry them as pretentious, fake artists, people who can't play an instrument (hinting that they don't really know anything about music)?  The answer clearly lies in the fear of knowledge.  Those who are afraid to gain knowledge, who thinks that knowledge will corrupt who they are, are the ones afraid and hostile towards those who dedicate their lives to knowledge, and to the expansion of the mind.

Those who fear knowledge, and who sense it will change them, are those who are always the most complicit in any fascist governments.  Fascist governments are controlled by people who insist that to think independently is to go against the law, and a punishable offense. Those who are afraid of knowledge, are only too happy to thrive under such systems, and therefore swoon and drool at their fascist dominatrixes. 

Stop insulting people who live a life that brings them pleasure, stop living in your cocoons of ignorance, and go outside and learn something about the world.

Walter Ramsey

[michael_langlois]

I guess I can't understand why people hear the word 'musicologist,' and automatically assume the worst.  What have these innocent, sequestered people - who in past centuries would have been harmless monks, happy among their studies and praising the Lord throughout the day - ever done to you, by you I mean you in general, to harbor such negativity in your mind?

When I think of a musicologist, I think of a jolly fellow in tweeds, perhaps with a soft beard, who gets no more pleasure than to open the pages of music history and analysis, who gets no more pleasure than to find the hidden connections which create historical continuity, who gets no more pleasure than to find the secrets that lie within the music, and to link the music with external events. 

What is so frightening about these people to you, that you decry them as pretentious, fake artists, people who can't play an instrument (hinting that they don't really know anything about music)?  The answer clearly lies in the fear of knowledge.  Those who are afraid to gain knowledge, who thinks that knowledge will corrupt who they are, are the ones afraid and hostile towards those who dedicate their lives to knowledge, and to the expansion of the mind.

Those who fear knowledge, and who sense it will change them, are those who are always the most complicit in any fascist governments.  Fascist governments are controlled by people who insist that to think independently is to go against the law, and a punishable offense. Those who are afraid of knowledge, are only too happy to thrive under such systems, and therefore swoon and drool at their fascist dominatrixes. 

Stop insulting people who live a life that brings them pleasure, stop living in your cocoons of ignorance, and go outside and learn something about the world.

Walter Ramsey

Reminds me of the stand-off between the lay faithful and the theologians, particularly in its unilateralism...

[mcgillcomposer]

I guess I can't understand why people hear the word 'musicologist,' and automatically assume the worst.  What have these innocent, sequestered people - who in past centuries would have been harmless monks, happy among their studies and praising the Lord throughout the day - ever done to you, by you I mean you in general, to harbor such negativity in your mind?

When I think of a musicologist, I think of a jolly fellow in tweeds, perhaps with a soft beard, who gets no more pleasure than to open the pages of music history and analysis, who gets no more pleasure than to find the hidden connections which create historical continuity, who gets no more pleasure than to find the secrets that lie within the music, and to link the music with external events. 

What is so frightening about these people to you, that you decry them as pretentious, fake artists, people who can't play an instrument (hinting that they don't really know anything about music)?  The answer clearly lies in the fear of knowledge.  Those who are afraid to gain knowledge, who thinks that knowledge will corrupt who they are, are the ones afraid and hostile towards those who dedicate their lives to knowledge, and to the expansion of the mind.

Those who fear knowledge, and who sense it will change them, are those who are always the most complicit in any fascist governments.  Fascist governments are controlled by people who insist that to think independently is to go against the law, and a punishable offense. Those who are afraid of knowledge, are only too happy to thrive under such systems, and therefore swoon and drool at their fascist dominatrixes. 

Stop insulting people who live a life that brings them pleasure, stop living in your cocoons of ignorance, and go outside and learn something about the world.

Walter Ramsey

It has nothing to do with being afraid of knowledge. Like I said in my post, there are several very good musicologists who I respect greatly - I even cited a few examples.

What I am sick of, however, are those who, in the pursuit of 'knowledge', put forth absolutely ridiculous 'theories' that are far-fethched or have very little to do with the music itself - especially when their main interest is in pushing forth their reputation rather than devoting themselves to this fantastic pursuit of knowledge you speak of. When it comes down to sheer musical skills, I often find them to be lacking.

I attended a conference recently on the works of Robert Schumann and a rather eminent musicologist (I won't drop names out of respect for her) gave a presentation on the a minor piano concerto. Her main claim was that Schumann contributed nothing to the evolution of the piano concerto. She then proceded to speak for 1 hour citing only textual examples from contemporary journals to support her argument...not one single mention of the actual music. She never considered for one second to give us MUSICAL reasons why the concerto did not contribute to the evolution of the genre - my guess is that she didn't have the skills necessary to determine even simple things in the music that are good and forward looking - At one point she cited this article that called Schumann's harmony 'backward and unoriginal'. Clearly, the author of that article is speaking out of his ass and has no idea of the criteria that make a certain harmony work or not work in a particular context - especially when it is used in a novel way.

[mattgreenecomposer]

"When I think of a musicologist, I think of a jolly fellow in tweeds, perhaps with a soft beard, who gets no more pleasure than to open the pages of music history and analysis, who gets no more pleasure than to find the hidden connections which create historical continuity, who gets no more pleasure than to find the secrets that lie within the music, and to link the music with external events." 

Lol!!!  You must not know many musicologists. 
Sorry, I have to side with McGill on this one.  Most of them are pretentious scholars who have nothing new to say and try to make up fictitious information about a composer or piece to sound original and get recognized.  Have you read some of the stuff in these Journal's? Well, unfortunately I had to when I was getting my masters degree and it sucked to put it bluntly.
I know several people in the field with Doctorate degree's (one who is a close friend of mine) and she will tell you the only way to get recognized is to go out and write something completely far fetched like Mcgill was describing.  On the other hand , if their work is valid and for the truth then God bless em.  There is no need to go off on some political tirade.

[ramseytheii]

I will grant it to you that there are these musicologist -ists, like in the other humanities, literature especially (Harold Bloom called these cultish sub-sections "literature of resentment.")  Perhaps an age difference will explain the difference in perception: it seems to me the politically-oriented musicologists are a current trend, a passing fad if you will, where as the true, old, serious ones are the ones I've always viewed as the majority.

But anyways, I think I see what you mean.

Walter Ramsey

[indutrial]

I guess I can't understand why people hear the word 'musicologist,' and automatically assume the worst.  What have these innocent, sequestered people - who in past centuries would have been harmless monks, happy among their studies and praising the Lord throughout the day - ever done to you, by you I mean you in general, to harbor such negativity in your mind?

Stop insulting people who live a life that brings them pleasure, stop living in your cocoons of ignorance, and go outside and learn something about the world.

Walter Ramsey

Performers have historically never liked the people who are least likely to kiss their ass and potentially criticize them or their beloved repertoire.

I agree with the idea that some musicologists act like the worst kind of intellectual do-nothing tenure-seeking losers, presenting useless paper after useless presentation regarding some esoteric triviality that does absolutely nothing to enrich the music world (the a minor concerto example is fitting) but I will still support the field because, conversely, it has produced loads of great texts and resources that have made my music studies a pleasure.

A good example off the top of my head is writer Adrian Thomas, who I've read 3 books by in the past year. Thomas' research is geared towards providing a wider knowledge (for those interested) of modern Polish composers like Gorecki and Bacewicz. His concern with opening new doors and creating new avenues for performers, researchers, and listeners to explore is in no way negative and to me shows the sizable and undeniable bright side to music history and musicology. Reading his work has given me a whole heap of things to devote my own interest towards, which is what any good writer should hope for. Not all of them are evil, self-serving bottom-feeders. I would say that a lot more performers are in the game for their own self-gratification.

[slobone]

Even if it were a bad performance, you still get the live music element.  If it's a bad presentation by a theory person, ouch.

Speaking for myself I'd rather sit through a boring lecture than a bad piano performance. And I've sat through plenty of both. At least at a lecture you can stop listening and think your own thoughts.

[indutrial]

Speaking for myself I'd rather sit through a boring lecture than a bad piano performance. And I've sat through plenty of both. At least at a lecture you can stop listening and think your own thoughts.

Also, at a boring lecture you can usually call out the lecturer after the presentation and question his/her ideas in a public manner. At a piano recital, good or bad, you're still obliged to clap and encourage the performer or else the more ignorant members of the audience will think you're being unduly mean and pretentious.